United States v. Demario Palmer
This text of 605 F. App'x 591 (United States v. Demario Palmer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Demario Palmer directly appeals after - he pled guilty to a drug offense, and the district court 1 sentenced him to a term of imprisonment below the calculated Guidelines range. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that the district court improperly denied Palmer’s request for a downward departure based on an overstated criminal history, and that Palmer’s sentence is substantively unreasonable.
The denial of Palmer’s request for a downward departure is not reviewable on *592 appeal, as the district court recognized its authority to depart, and there is no indication that the district court had any unconstitutional motive in denying the request. See United States v. Anderson, 570 F.3d 1025, 1034 (8th Cir.2009). As to the substantive reasonableness of Palmer’s sentence, we conclude, upon careful review, that no abuse of discretion occurred. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir.2009) (en banc); United States v. Moore, 581 F.3d 681, 683 (8th Cir.2009) (per curiam).
In addition, having independently reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivo-lous issues. Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm.
. The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
605 F. App'x 591, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-demario-palmer-ca8-2015.